Rhetoric, technical writing, and ethics
Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (4):463-478 (1999)
Abstract
Many outside science and engineering, especially social scientists and “rhetoricians”, claim that rhetoric, “the art of persuasion”, is an important part of technical communication. This claim is either trivial or false. If “persuasion” simply means “effective communication”, then, of course, rhetoric is an important part of technical communication. But, if “persuasion” has anything like its traditional meaning (a specific art of winning conviction), rhetoric is not an important part of technical communication; indeed, its use in technical communication would be unethical. [By] an advocate is meant one whose business it is to smooth over real difficulties, and to persuade where he cannot convince.Author's Profile
DOI
10.1007/s11948-999-0046-1
My notes
Similar books and articles
Some steps towards the recovery of technical writing as a democratic art: An historicist plea for rhetoric: Commentary on “Rhetoric, technical writing and ethics”.S. Fuller - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (4):479-483.
Philosophers on Rhetoric: Traditional and Emerging Views.Donald G. Douglas - 1973 - Skokie, Ill., National Textbook Co..
By way of interruption: Levinas and the ethics of communication (review).Diane Davis - 2010 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 43 (3):289-295.
The Rhetoric of RHETORIC: The Quest for Effective Communication (review).Carolyn R. Miller - 2006 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 39 (3):261-263.
The Challenger Disaster And The Revival Of Rhetoric In Organizational Life.Alan G. Gross & Arthur Walzer - 1997 - Argumentation 11 (1):85-93.
Integrating ethics into technical courses: Micro-insertion. [REVIEW]Michael Davis - 2006 - Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (4):717-730.
Rhetoric - G. A. Kennedy: A New History of Classical Rhetoric. An Extensive Revision and Abridgement of The Art of Persuasion in Greece, The Art of Rhetoric in the Roman World_ and _Greek Rhetoric Under Christian Emperors With Additional Discussion of Late Latin Rhetoric. Pp. xii+301. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994. Paper. [REVIEW]Y. L. Too - 1996 - The Classical Review 46 (1):60-61.
Commentary on “Rhetoric, Technical Writing and Ethics” (michael davis).Paul B. Thompson - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (4):484-486.
Analytics
Added to PP
2009-01-28
Downloads
37 (#317,702)
6 months
2 (#298,943)
2009-01-28
Downloads
37 (#317,702)
6 months
2 (#298,943)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
Commentary on “Rhetoric, Technical Writing and Ethics” (michael davis).Paul B. Thompson - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (4):484-486.
Some steps towards the recovery of technical writing as a democratic art: An historicist plea for rhetoric: Commentary on “Rhetoric, technical writing and ethics”.S. Fuller - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (4):479-483.
Editorial—our developing profile.Stephanic J. Bird - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (2):146-146.
References found in this work
Better communication between engineers and managers: Some ways to prevent many ethically hard choices.Michael Davis - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (2):171-212.
The Foundations of Modern Political Thought. Volume I: The Renaissance.Quentin Skinner - 1980 - Mind 89 (355):443-446.